Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 1950–2025 4 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Delco Wire & Cable, Inc. v. Weinbergergreen2 sentences2022Twp. of Neshannock, 181 A.3d at 474 (citing Delco Wire & Cable, Inc. v. Weinberger, 109 F.R.D. 680, 688 (E.D. 2018Our federal courts have held that "[ t ] o sustain this burden of proof , the party asserting the privilege must show , by record evidence such as affidavits, ' sufficient facts as to bring the [ communications at issue ] within the narrow confines of the privilege .' " 9 Delco Wire & Cable, Inc. v. Weinberger , 109 F.R.D. 680 , 688 (E.D. | 1 | 2 |
Gould v. City of Aliquippagreen1 sentence2024Government entities are entitled to assert this privilege and “may claim privilege for communications between their attorney and their agents or employees who are authorized to act on behalf of the entities.” Gould v. City of Aliquippa, 750 A.2d 934, 937 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000). | 1 | 1 |
Commonwealth v. Hudegreen1 sentence2022See Appellant’s Brief at 20, citing Commonwealth v. Hude, 425 A.2d 313, 321 (Pa. 1980). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Twp. of Neshannock v. Kirila Contractors, Inc.
green
2 sentences2025To carry the initial burden, the party asserting the privilege must show, “by record evidence such as affidavits, sufficient facts as to bring the communications at issue within the narrow confines of the privilege.” Id. (citation, quotations, and editing removed). 2024To invoke the privilege “the party asserting the privilege must show, by record evidence such as affidavits, []sufficient facts as to bring the [communications at issue] within the narrow confines of the privilege.[]” Id. (internal quotation marks, emphasis, and citation omitted). | 3 | 2022–2025 |
Guy v. Liederbach
green
2 sentences1988Appellants have valiantly attempted to fit themselves within the narrow confines of an exception created in Guy v. Liederbach, 501 Pa. 47 , 459 A.2d 744 (1983), but have not succeeded. 1988Appellants have valiantly attempted to fit themselves within the narrow confines of an exception created in Guy v. Liederbach, 501 Pa. 47 , 459 A.2d 744 (1983), but have not succeeded. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
Morss v. Palmer
green
1 sentence1950The rule is stated in Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Edition, sec. 1614, as follows: “. . . the absence of utterances unfavorable to a person is a sufficient basis for predicating that the general opinion of him is favorable.” And in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51 , at page 57, it is said: “But surely it is evidence in support of character, that a witness acquainted with the person assailed, living in his neighborhood, has never heard any ill of him.” The admissibility of negative proof of good reputation is recognized without extended discussion in Milliken v. Long, 188 Pa. 411 , 41 A. 540 ; Com. v. Ty | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Milliken v. Long
neutral
2 sentences1950The rule is stated in Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Edition, sec. 1614, as follows: “. . . the absence of utterances unfavorable to a person is a sufficient basis for predicating that the general opinion of him is favorable.” And in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51 , at page 57, it is said: “But surely it is evidence in support of character, that a witness acquainted with the person assailed, living in his neighborhood, has never heard any ill of him.” The admissibility of negative proof of good reputation is recognized without extended discussion in Milliken v. Long, 188 Pa. 411 , 41 A. 540 ; Com. v. Ty 1950The rule is stated in Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Edition, sec. 1614, as follows: “. . . the absence of utterances unfavorable to a person is a sufficient basis for predicating that the general opinion of him is favorable.” And in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51 , at page 57, it is said: “But surely it is evidence in support of character, that a witness acquainted with the person assailed, living in his neighborhood, has never heard any ill of him.” The admissibility of negative proof of good reputation is recognized without extended discussion in Milliken v. Long, 188 Pa. 411 , 41 A. 540 ; Com. v. Ty | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Commonwealth v. Tyahla
neutral
2 sentences1950The rule is stated in Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Edition, sec. 1614, as follows: “. . . the absence of utterances unfavorable to a person is a sufficient basis for predicating that the general opinion of him is favorable.” And in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51 , at page 57, it is said: “But surely it is evidence in support of character, that a witness acquainted with the person assailed, living in his neighborhood, has never heard any ill of him.” The admissibility of negative proof of good reputation is recognized without extended discussion in Milliken v. Long, 188 Pa. 411 , 41 A. 540 ; Com. v. Ty 1950The rule is stated in Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Edition, sec. 1614, as follows: “. . . the absence of utterances unfavorable to a person is a sufficient basis for predicating that the general opinion of him is favorable.” And in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51 , at page 57, it is said: “But surely it is evidence in support of character, that a witness acquainted with the person assailed, living in his neighborhood, has never heard any ill of him.” The admissibility of negative proof of good reputation is recognized without extended discussion in Milliken v. Long, 188 Pa. 411 , 41 A. 540 ; Com. v. Ty | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Commonwealth v. McGillicuddy
neutral
1 sentence1950The rule is stated in Wigmore on Evidence, 3rd Edition, sec. 1614, as follows: “. . . the absence of utterances unfavorable to a person is a sufficient basis for predicating that the general opinion of him is favorable.” And in Morss v. Palmer, 15 Pa. 51 , at page 57, it is said: “But surely it is evidence in support of character, that a witness acquainted with the person assailed, living in his neighborhood, has never heard any ill of him.” The admissibility of negative proof of good reputation is recognized without extended discussion in Milliken v. Long, 188 Pa. 411 , 41 A. 540 ; Com. v. Ty | 1 | 1950–1950 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.